Each year for what seems to be decades, your Taxpayers Association has suggested Fiscal Policies that would produce a more responsible government and lower tax rates. We would like all of our members and readers to understand what we are trying to accomplish, so we’ll revue the basics of property taxation and what we are recommending to the County.
Property owners are assessed on the “Taxable Value” of their property. Collectively this is called the tax base; the total value of real property, intangible property and taxable personal property, as determined by the County Property Appraiser. Martin County’s tax base has steadily increased since the 1970’s reflecting the added value of new construction as well as the increased value of existing property. The total value of the County’s property is not equal to its taxable value because of the protections afforded “Homesteaded” homes that are owner occupied by full time residents of Martin County.
The amount each taxpayer owes is the taxable value of their property multiplied by the millage assessed by the various government entities. A “Mill” is one dollar per thousand dollars of taxable value. As an example, a one million dollar taxable value, with a one-mill tax rate, produces one thousand dollars of property tax. These taxes collected based on value are called “Ad Valorem”. Last years total taxable value, as determined by the Property Appraiser, was about seventeen BILLION dollars, so each “Mill” assessed was worth $17,000,000!
The “Millage Rate” for our county government is determined by the County Commission. The total assessed is the amount of mills required to fund the projected Ad Valorem budget of the County, including the Sheriff, the Clerk of Courts, Supervisor of Elections, Tax Collector, Property Appraiser and all functions of the County Commission. The “Millage Rage” assessed by the School Board is set by the State. The State Constitution caps the “Millage Rate” at ten mills maximum.
We would like the County to adopt a “Roll Back Rate” as the base for each yearly budget. This is the total amount of “Mills” required to produce the same amount of revenue as collected in the previous year. A “Roll Back Rate” does not reduce the budget amount, it reduces the millage so that the amount of taxes collected are what was required to fund the previous year’s budget. Any additions would then have to be justified.
Your Martin County Taxpayers Association encourages the County Commission to adopt the “Roll Back Rate” as its annual Millage Rate. The reasons for this are to make new growth pay for its share of government costs, reduce the tax burden on local employers and businesses, and limit the rapid growth of government. In other words, we want our government to face the same choices our citizens must make and to have to prioritize its expenditures.
In order to achieve the desired “Roll Back Rate” we offer the following suggestions as the basis for a “Sustainable Fiscal Policy”.
Annual forecasts of revenues and expenses that include at least five years of actual historic experience should be made for reference purposes. The multi-year history and forecasts will then be reviewed annually prior to adoption of the Fiscal Policy. The draft annual operating and capital budgets prepared by staff, and the final budgets adopted by BOCC, should then be consistent with the adopted Fiscal Policy.
Capital Projects required to maintain Comprehensive Plan Levels of Service should be the first priority in budgeting and scheduling. Growth-related Capital Projects shall be funded 100% by impacts fees. Recurring annual revenues shall fund repair and replacement Capital Projects.
Personnel costs and employee benefits are among the highest costs of government. All County employees should be treated equally with regard to potential increases in pay and benefits. Every government function should be analyzed with a goal of personnel reduction or privatization.
Partner with other governments and private enterprise, where possible, to avoid duplication of expenditures and services.
User fees and charges for services shall be evaluated to cover actual costs with as much attention paid to reduction as to the necessity for increases. Enterprise funds shall not be charged more than 5% in indirect costs fees by General Government.